THE PARLIAMENT OF 1624. ALLIANCE WITH FRANCE.
After the Prince had taken leave of his Spanish escort, and had gone
on board an English fleet at Santander, whither it had put in to fetch
him away, contrary winds, or, in the words of a contemporary
narrative, 'the brothers Boreas and Eurus,' for a while delayed his
departure. We are assured that people in England never regarded the
weathercocks and the direction of the smoke and of the clouds with
more painful anxiety than at that time. Even among the dependents of
the royal house many almost gave up the Prince as lost; for who, they
said, could trust the word of the Spaniards? The Protestant part of
the population thought that he would at least be compelled to abjure
his religion. At last the wind subsided. On October 5, after an
absence of almost eight months, the Prince arrived in Portsmouth, and
the day after in London. The universal joy with which he was received
was indescribable: all business was at a standstill; the shops were
shut; nothing was seen but waggons driving backwards and forwards,
laden with the wood intended for the bonfires which blazed at evening
in all the open squares, at all corners of the streets, even in the
inner courts, but were most brilliant and costly at the
Guildhall.[432] The joyful acclamations of the multitude mingled with
the sound of the bells; people congratulated each other that the heir
to the throne had returned as he had gone, and that without the
Infanta; for this marriage had never been popular; but above all, that
he returned rather confirmed than shaken in his religion. They
praised God for his deliverance out of the land of Egypt. Even
Buckingham, who was not loved at other times, enjoyed a moment of
universal popularity.
Nevertheless the effect which would have been most welcome to the
majority, that of banishing all thoughts of an alliance with Catholic
powers, and of causing a wife to be sought for the Prince among
Protestants, was certainly not produced, for the King had long been
revolving another plan. The combination with Spain, although it had
best corresponded to his wishes and ideas, had nevertheless been only
an experiment: when it miscarried, he was predisposed to return to the
thought of an alliance with France. The Prince, on his way through
France, had already seized the opportunity of seeing the Princess, his
possible bride, while she was dancing, without being remarked by her;
and the impression which she made upon him had been by no means
unfavourable.
Instantly on his return from Spain Buckingham opened communications
with Mary de' Medici, Queen of France, and that through means of a
Franciscan monk, who could not be suspected, and who presented himself
to her while she was at dinner. Buckingham made secret overtures to
her, intimating that he wished to resume the old negotiations for an
alliance between the royal families of England and France, for that he
was a Frenchman at heart.[433] As the Queen expressed herself
favourably inclined, Henry Rich, who then bore the title of Lord
Kensington, and afterwards that of Lord Holland, was sent before the
end of the year 1623 on a secret mission to France in order to set the
affair in motion. Rich was one of the most intimate friends of
Buckingham, and to a certain extent resembled him in character.
[Sidenote: A.D. 1624.]
In this affair Buckingham had two circumstances in his favour. It was
the main ambition of the Queen-mother to see her daughter on the
throne of the neighbouring kingdom. The preference accorded by the
English court to an Infanta of Spain over a daughter of France had
had a painful effect upon her: she was the more gratified when that
court now resumed the negotiations which had been broken off.
Nevertheless she did not embark on so delicate an affair, the failure
of which was still possible, without the necessary reserve. The French
court could not but ask for religious concessions in favour of the
Princess, as Spain had for the Infanta: but on the very first approach
to the subject it hinted that it would not urge the King to such
strict pledges as had been demanded on the side of the Spaniards.[434]
The second influence in Buckingham's favour was the political. The
advance of the alliance, and of the power of the Spaniards, especially
their establishment in the Palatinate, aroused the jealousy of the
French. The opinion, which Cardinal Richelieu so often emphatically
expressed, that France, everywhere enclosed by the power of the
Spaniards, might some day be prostrated by it, was generally held. The
interests of his country seemed to be deeply interested when England,
from whose close connexion with Spain the greatest danger was to be
apprehended, separated herself from that power, and showed a
disposition to adopt a policy in harmony with that of France. Henry
Rich assures us that so universal an agreement had never been known
among Frenchmen as was shown at that time in the wish to ally
themselves with England. Already agents of Mansfeld and Brunswick were
seen at Court: an intended mission to Maximilian of Bavaria was given
up on the representation of the English ambassador. Envoys from the
expelled King of Bohemia also soon arrived, in order to gain the
co-operation of the French in his restoration. The negotiations with
England actually began: they were directed to an alliance and a
marriage at the same time: in each case it was made a preliminary
condition that England should openly and completely break with Spain.
But this condition could not be fulfilled in England quite easily and
without opposition.
And how indeed could it have been expected that the members of the
Privy Council, who had followed the King in the direction given to his
policy in favour of Spain, if not without any reserve, yet with an
ardour which might be turned to their reproach, would now, as it were,
turn round, and follow the example of the favourite in entering on
another path? A commission chosen from their body was appointed in
order to take into consideration the complaints made by Buckingham
about the behaviour of the Spanish court. But the report which
Buckingham made was by no means so convincing as to win their
concurrence. He rather depended on impressions, which had no doubt in
his own eyes a certain truth, than on facts which might have served as
evidence for others as well. The commission declared itself almost
unanimously against him.[435] Its sentence was, that Philip IV had
seriously intended to marry his sister to the Prince; and that in the
affair of the Palatinate he had behaved, if not as a friend, yet at
any rate not as an enemy. The first part is undoubtedly correct; with
regard to the second however, neither the members of the Privy Council
had any suspicion, nor had Buckingham himself any real information,
that the Spaniards had made the interests of Austria in the Palatinate
so decidedly their own. The Council was moreover in an ill humour with
the favourite on account of the arbitrary authority which he arrogated
to himself. When Lord Bristol came to England in the beginning of the
year 1624, and then laid all the blame on Buckingham himself, a party
was formed against the latter, which sought to overthrow him, and was
even thought to have already secured a new favourite, with whom to
replace Buckingham, just as he had formerly stepped into the place of
Somerset. It was remarked that the friends and adherents of Somerset,
who had always been on the side of Spain, came together and bestirred
themselves. It was clear, and was generally said, that if relations
with Spain were not broken off, the minister must fall. As people
expressed it, 'either the marriage must break or Buckingham.'
In this danger Buckingham resolved on a step of the greatest
significance, in order to be able at once to attack the Spaniards, and
to meet his rivals at home. He turned to those who had for many years
demanded war with Spain on principle, the popular and zealous
Protestant party. The King assented to his request for the summoning
of a new Parliament, of which he had in fact for other reasons already
given notice. As was to be expected from the connexion of affairs, the
result of the elections corresponded with the views of the last
Parliament. Men like Coke, who had been called to account for their
attitude at that time, were re-elected two or three times over. The
ruling minister now regarded them even as his allies.
What an indescribable advantage however for the supporters of the
claims of Parliament was this change! As the ill-success of the German
policy of the King in the year 1621 had turned to their advantage, so
now they profited by the failure of his negotiations with Spain. The
political leanings of James I in favour of Spain, which they had
originally opposed, had led to embarrassments in which the First
Minister himself invoked their aid.
But not only did party rivalries display themselves at this important
moment, but a general opposition also arose on constitutional grounds.
The Earl of Carlisle represented to the King that he had been visited
by members of Parliament, no mere popular leaders or speakers, but
quiet men and good patriots, who feared God and honoured the King:
that he had learned from them that the agitation observed in the
country had principally arisen because the last grants of Parliament
had not been met by any favours on the part of the King, but on the
contrary the expression of opinions displeasing to him on the part of
certain members had been subsequently punished by their arrest.
Carlisle reminded the King that nothing could be more hateful to his
enemies, or more strengthening and encouraging to his friends, than
the removal of these disagreements; that no king had ever had better
subjects if he would but trust them; that if he would but show them
that he relied on their counsel and support, he would win their hearts
and command their fortunes; and that the people would then work with
him for the welfare and honour of the State.[436]
These views prevailed when Parliament was opened on the 19th of
February, 1624. Hitherto it had been one of the principal grievances
of the King that Parliament wished to have a voice in affairs that
concerned his state and his family. The new Parliament was opened with
a detailed account from Buckingham of his negotiations with Spain,
which affected both these interests, and with a request that
Parliament would report on the great questions awaiting
settlement.[437]
The answer of both Houses was, that it was contrary to the honour of
the King, to the welfare of his people, to the interest of his
children, and even to the terms of his former alliances, to continue
the negotiations with Spain any longer: they prayed him to break off
negotiations on both subjects, with regard to the Palatinate, as well
as with regard to the marriage. It was hailed as a public blessing
that the conditions accepted for the sake of the latter would not now
be fulfilled.
At this moment Buckingham's wishes were on the side of this policy;
for otherwise he could not have advanced a step in his dealings with
France. But the King had not so fully made up his mind. He had
approved the overtures made to France: but when he was now asked to
break with Spain, the power which he most feared, and whose friendship
it was the first principle of his policy to cultivate, there was
something in him which recoiled from the step. Buckingham acknowledged
for the first time that he was not of the same mind with the King. He
said that he wished to tread only in one path, whereas the King
thought that he could walk in two different paths at once; but that
the King must choose between the Spaniards and his own subjects. He
asked him whether, supposing that sufficient subsidies of a definite
amount were at once granted him, and the support of his subjects with
their lives and fortunes were promised him for the future, so far as
it might be necessary--whether in that case he would resolve to break
off the matrimonial alliance with Spain. He asked for a
straightforward and definite answer, that he might be able to give
information on the subject beforehand to some members of Parliament.
It is evident that this was no longer the attitude of a favourite, who
has only to express the opinions and wishes of his prince. Buckingham
came forward as a statesman, who opposes his own insight to the aims
of his sovereign. He says that if he should concur with the King, he
should be a flatterer; that if he should fail to express his own
opinion, he should be a traitor. In this matter he could rely on the
support of the Prince, who, without estranging himself from his
father, still appeared to be less dependent on his will than
before.[438] The result was that James I again gave way. He named the
sum which he should require for the defence of his kingdom, for the
support of his neighbours, and for the discharge of his own debts.
Parliament, although it did not grant the whole amount demanded, yet
granted a very considerable sum: it agreed to pay three full subsidies
and three fifteenths within a year, if the negotiations were broken
off. At the beginning of April Buckingham was able to announce to
Parliament that the King, in consequence of the advice given to him,
had finally broken off negotiations with Spain on both matters.
Other and further concessions of the greatest extent were coupled with
this announcement. The King promised that, if a war should break out,
he would not entertain any proposals for peace without the advice of
Parliament. It was of still more importance, for the moment at least,
that he declared himself willing to allow Parliament itself to dispose
of the sums it had granted. He said that he wished to have nothing to
do with them: that Parliament itself might nominate a treasurer. These
likewise were admissions which Buckingham had demanded from the
King:[439] but it maybe supposed that he had a previous understanding
on the subject with the leaders of the Parliament. He also
represented to the King that the removal of the old grievances was an
absolute necessity. The monopolies to which James had so long clung,
and which he had so obstinately defended, he now in turn gave up;
while the penal laws against the Catholics, to which he was averse,
were revived.
This was an intestine struggle between the different powers in the
state, as well as a question of policy. Parliament and the favourite
made common cause against the Privy Council, which was on the side of
Spain.
Among his opponents in the Privy Council, Buckingham hated none so
much as the Lord Treasurer Cranfield, then Earl of Middlesex, for
Cranfield, although raised from a humble station by Buckingham
himself, had the courage to resist him on the Spanish question.[440]
By his strict and successful management of business, Cranfield had won
the favour of the King, who believed that he had found in him a second
Sully. It seems that Cranfield himself had intended to effect the ruin
of Buckingham: but Buckingham was too strong for him. Certain
accusations, which were partly well founded, were made available in
bringing him to trial by Parliamentary means, and in removing him from
his office like Bacon; for he had incurred the enmity of many by his
strictness and incorruptibility. The King professed to regard this
case as even worse than the former, because Bacon had acknowledged his
guilt, while Cranfield denied all guilt. The doctrine of the
responsibility of ministers was by this means advanced still further,
for it was now becoming more dangerous to fall out with Parliament
than with the King.
The authority of Parliament in general made important strides. It now
threw paramount weight into those deliberations which concerned the
general affairs of the kingdom, war and peace, and the royal family.
What became of the principle on which the King had hitherto taken his
stand, that the decision of these matters must be left exclusively to
his discretion? Parliament again assumed the attitude which three
years before had led to its dissolution.
It was not possible that James I could look on all this without
displeasure and uneasiness. Sometimes the thought occurred to him that
Buckingham had not been the right man to conduct the negotiations with
Spain. The words escaped him that, if he had sent the Lord Keeper
Williams with his son instead of Buckingham, his honour would then
have been saved, and his heart would now beat more lightly. He did not
approve of the decided turn which was being given to foreign politics.
He was once heard to say that he was a poor old man, who in former
times had known something about politics, but who now knew nothing
more about them.
It seems indeed that he had fancied that he could still continue to
hold the balance between parties: so at least those who knew James
understood him. He had no intention of allowing Buckingham's fall, as
the enemies of that nobleman wished, but he perhaps thought of finding
a counterpoise for him: he did not wish to let him become lord and
master of affairs. On the other hand Buckingham, by his connexion with
the leading men of the Lower House, had already won an independent
position, in which he was no longer at the mercy of the King. He may
perhaps be set down as the first English minister who, supported by
Parliament and by public opinion, induced or compelled the King to
adopt a policy on which of his own accord he would not have resolved.
In conjunction with his new friends Buckingham succeeded in breaking
up the Spanish party, with which he now for the first time came into
conflict: his adherents congratulated him on his success.[441] In
court and state a kind of reaction against the previous importance of
this party set in. The offices which were vacated by the fall of
Cranfield were conferred on men of the other party, the kind of men
who had formerly been displaced under the influence of Gondomar.
Seamen were acquitted who had shown the same disregard for orders as
Walter Ralegh had once done, and preparations were made to indemnify
Ralegh's posterity for the loss of property which they had suffered.
The Spanish ambassadors at court availed themselves of a moment of ill
humour on the part of the King, to whom indeed they had again obtained
access, to call his attention to the loss of authority which
threatened him on account of Buckingham's combination with the leading
men in the Parliament. But in what they said they mingled so much
falsehood with the truth that they could be easily refuted; and
Buckingham successfully resisted this attack also.
People still perceived in the King his old indecision. He consented,
it is true, that Mansfeld, whom he had formerly helped the Spaniards
to expel from his strong position on the Upper Rhine, should now be
supported by English as well as French money in a new campaign to
recover the Palatinate. But nevertheless he wished at the same time to
enjoin him as a condition to abstain from attacking any country which
rightfully belonged to the Archduchess Isabella, or to the crown of
Spain.[442] So far was he still from undertaking open war against
Spain, as his subjects hoped and expected.
And though he acceded to the negotiations with France, yet in this
transaction the very circumstance which displeased the majority of his
subjects--namely that he was hereby making an alliance with a Catholic
power--was acceptable to him. For even then he would not have
consented at any price to have interfered in the general religious
quarrel merely on religious grounds. He felt no hesitation in
promising the French, as he had the Spaniards, not only freedom of
religion in behalf of the future queen, but even relief for his
Catholic subjects in regard to the penal laws imposed by Parliament.
Yet he could have wished that they had contented themselves with his
simple promise. One of his envoys, Lord Nithisdale, was himself of
this opinion. On the other side it was remarked that perhaps the
Catholics, of whom he also was one, might be contented with a promise
from their sovereign, on whom their whole welfare depended, but that
the French government could not, as it must have a dispensation from
the Pope, which could not be obtained without a written assurance.
James I at first declared himself ready to give such a declaration in
a letter to the king of France, and La Vieuville, who was minister at
the time, expressed himself content with that. But after his fall and
Richelieu's accession to power this arrangement was rejected. It was
in vain that the King's ambassadors held out a prospect that the
letter should be signed by the Prince and by the chief Secretary of
State; the French insisted that the King should ratify not only the
treaty, but also a special engagement which they themselves wished to
frame and to lay before Urban VIII. The English plenipotentiaries at
the French court, Holland and Carlisle, were still refusing to agree
to this, when King James had already given way to the French
ambassador in England.
The agreement, in the form in which it was at last concluded, was in
some points more advantageous for England than that with Spain had
been. While the latter stipulated that the laws which had been passed,
or might hereafter be passed, in England against the Catholics were
not to be applied to the royal children, but that these on the
contrary were still to be secured in their right to the succession, an
agreement which, as was mentioned, opened a prospect of an alteration
in the religion of the reigning family; this supposition was avoided
in the contract with France. But it was agreed on the other hand that
the future queen was to conduct the education of her children, not
merely till their tenth year, as had been stipulated with Spain, but
till their thirteenth. She herself and her household were also to
enjoy a higher degree of ecclesiastical independence; the
superintendence of a bishop was even allowed them. It was the ambition
of the Pope to demand not much less from the French than his
predecessor had demanded from the Spaniards as the price of bestowing
a dispensation for the marriage of a Catholic princess with a
Protestant prince; and it was the ambition of the French court to
offer him, or at least to appear to offer him, no less. In the
special assurance above mentioned James gave a promise that his
Catholic subjects should look forward to the enjoyment of still
greater freedom than that which would have been conferred on them by
the agreement with Spain. They were not to be molested for the sake of
religion, either in their persons or in their possessions, supposing
that in other respects they conducted themselves as good and loyal
subjects.[443]
The English ambassadors took exception to single expressions: the King
himself passed lightly over them. He was mainly induced to do so by
the absence from the agreement with France of the most offensive and
burdensome clauses which had been contained in the secret articles of
the treaty with Spain. On December 12, 1624, the treaty was signed at
Cambridge by the King, and the special assurance both by the King and
by the Prince.
James I wished to see his son married. At the Christmas immediately
following he greeted him according to English fashion with the
tenderest expressions: he said that he existed only for his sake; that
he had rather live with him in banishment than lead a desolate life
without him. He thought that the treaty of marriage which had just
been concluded would establish his happiness for ever.
[Sidenote: A.D. 1625.]
An alliance between France and England for the recovery of the
Palatinate was now moreover in contemplation. From the first moment
the French had acknowledged that this would be to their own interest,
and had promised to assist in that object to the extent of their
power. Nevertheless they hesitated to conclude an express agreement
for this object; for what would the Pope say if they allied
themselves with Protestants against Catholics? At last they submitted
a declaration in writing, but this appeared to the English ambassadors
so unsatisfactory, that they preferred to return it to them. The
French said that this time they would perform more than they promised.
Although exceptions of many kinds might be made to their performances,
yet they were really seriously bent on doing as much as possible for
the recovery of the Palatinate. Just at that time Richelieu had
stepped into power, and he expressly directed the policy of France to
the destruction of the position which the Spaniards had occupied on
the Middle Rhine. In spite of the obstructive efforts of a party which
had both ecclesiastical and political objects in view, he concluded
the arrangements for the marriage of the Princess to the Prince of
Wales without any delay, even without waiting for the last word of the
Pope.
By this means the connexion which the King had formed in earlier years
seemed once more to be revived. The Duke of Savoy and the Republic of
Venice supported Mansfeld's preparations with subsidies of money. The
States General took the most lively interest in the warlike movements
in Germany, on which the Elector of Brandenburg also set his hopes.
The King of Denmark offered his help in the matter with a readiness
which created astonishment. While the English ambassadors were busy in
adjusting the disputes that were constantly springing up afresh
between him and Sweden, he gathered the estates of Lower Saxony around
him, in order to check the swift advance of the Catholic League.[444]
Of the members of the old alliance the princes of Upper Germany alone
were absent. It was hoped that the Union would be revived by the
efforts of Lower Germany, and above all that its head, the Elector
Palatine, would be restored to his country.
Induced by the failure of peaceful negotiations for the restoration
of his son-in-law, James allowed greater progress to be made in the
direction of war than he had ever done before. He took an eager
interest in the preliminaries and preparations for war, even for a
naval war. But would he ever have proceeded to action? While preparing
to attack the Emperor and the League did he intend to do anything more
than make a demonstration against Spain? In truth it may be doubted.
He never allowed his English troops to attempt anything for the relief
of Breda, which at that time was still blockaded by the
Spaniards.[445]
And in his alliance with France he certainly still held fast to his
original principles.
The marriage of his son to a Catholic princess, and the indulgence
towards the Catholics to which he thereby pledged himself, express the
most characteristic tendencies of his policy. Notwithstanding all the
concessions which he made to Parliament, he still refused to grant
many of the demands which were addressed to him. The special agreement
which he made with France corresponded to the conception which he had
formed of his prerogative. By means of it he imported into relations
controlled by the law of nations his claim to give by virtue of his
royal power a dispensation even from laws that had been passed by
Parliament.
After, as well as before, this event his idea was to control and to
combine into harmony the conflicting elements within his kingdom by
his personal will; outside his kingdom, to guide or to regulate events
by clever policy. This is the important feature in the position and in
the pacific attitude of this sovereign. But the blame which attaches
to him is also connected with it. He made each and everything, however
important it might be in itself, merely secondary to his political
calculation. His high-flying thoughts have something laboured and flat
about them; they are almost too closely connected with a conscious,
and at the same time personal, end; they want that free sweep which is
necessary for enlisting the interest of contemporaries and of
posterity. And could the policy of James ever have prevailed? Was it
not in its own nature already a failure? A great crisis was hanging
over England when King James died (March 1625). He had once more
received the Lord's Supper after the Anglican use, with edifying
expressions of contrition: a numerous assembly had been present, for
he wished every one to know that he died holding the same views which
he had professed, and had contended for in his writings during his
lifetime.
NOTES:
[432] 'True mirth and gladness was in every face, and healths ran
bravely round in every place.' John Taylor, Prince Charles his Welcome
from Spaine: in Somers ii. 552.
[433] Mémoires de Richelieu. Ranke, Französische Geschichte v. 133
(Werke xii. 162).
[434] Kensington to Buckingham: 'Neither will they strain us to any
unreasonablenesse in conditions for our Catholics.' Cabala 275.
[435] Hacket, Life of Williams 169. 'Scarce any in all the Consulto
did vote to my Lords satisfaction.'
[436] The Earl of Carlisle to His Majesty, Feb. 14, 1624. He signs
himself 'Your Majesty's most humble, most obedient obliged creature
subject and servant.'
[437] Valaresso already observes this, March 8, 1624: 'Nell'ultimo
parlamento si chiamava felonia di parlare di quello, che hora si
transmette alla libera consultatione del presente.'
[438] A. Valaresso, Dec. 15, 1623: 'Col re usa qualche minor rispetto;
agli altri da maggior sodisfattione del solito. Parla con Più liberta
della Spagna.'
[439] Of all Buckingham's letters to the King, without doubt the most
remarkable. Hardwicke i. 466: 'Risolve constantly to run one way.'
[440] Valaresso, April 26. 'La persona merita male perche certo fu
d'affetto Spagnola.' He accuses him of a 'Somma scarsezza di pagare.'
Chamberlain says of him at his appearance on the scene October 1621:
'whom the King, in his piercing judgment, finds best able to do him
service.'
[441] Robert Philips to Buckingham, August 9, 1624. 'You have to your
perpetual glory already dissolved and broken the Spanish party.'
[442] 'Not to attempt any act of hostility upon any of the lawful
dominions or possessions of the king of spain or the Archiduchess.' He
then at any rate supposed certain cases in which this might take
place. Hardwicke Papers i. 548.
[443] Escrit particulier: 'qu'il permettra a tous ses subjects
Catholiques Romains de jouir de plus de liberté et franchise en ce qui
regarde leur religion qu'ils n'eussent fait en vertu d'articles
quelconques accordés par le traité de mariage fait avec l'Espagne, ne
voulant que ses subjects Catholiques puissent estre inquiétés en leurs
personnes et biens pour faire profession de la dite religion et vivre
en Catholiques pourvu toutesfois qu'ils en usent modestement, et
rendent l'obéissance que de bons et vrays subjects doivent à leur roy,
qu'il par sa bonté ne les restreindra pas à aucun sentiment contraire
à leur religion.' Hardwicke Papers i. 546. The English ambassadors
complain that the word 'liberté' had been inserted by the French
without first informing them.
[444] Conway to Carlisle, Feb. 24, 1624-25: 'In contemplation of H.
Majesty the king of Denmark hath come to the propositions--upon which
H. M. upon good grounds hath made dispatche to the king of Denmark
agreeing to the kings of Denmarks propositions.' Hardwicke Papers i.
560.
[445] Valaresso: 'Non è possibile di rimoverlo di contravenire alle
tante promesse verso Spagnoli et alle sue prime dichiarationi.'